Prevent Nautilus / Nemo from creating .Trash-1000 folder in mounted devices
Both Nautilus and Nemo create hidden folders called .Trash-1000 in any mounted device, apparently to manage their Trash folder. This is mighty confusing in network drives that are mounted by other users, that may be using other operating systems or programmes that do not recognise this folder as a trash bin.
Moreover, this folder expands with the number of files deleted and can not be erased from Ubuntu:
$ sudo rm -rf ./.Trash-1000
rm: cannot remove './.Trash-1000/files': Directory not empty
To free space in such mounted volumes the .Trash-1000 folder must be deleted from a different system.
Is there any way to prevent Nemo or Nautilus from creating this folder in network drives? I can naturally simply not use them, but they are handy in many situations.
nautilus trash nemo network-drive
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
|
show 1 more comment
Both Nautilus and Nemo create hidden folders called .Trash-1000 in any mounted device, apparently to manage their Trash folder. This is mighty confusing in network drives that are mounted by other users, that may be using other operating systems or programmes that do not recognise this folder as a trash bin.
Moreover, this folder expands with the number of files deleted and can not be erased from Ubuntu:
$ sudo rm -rf ./.Trash-1000
rm: cannot remove './.Trash-1000/files': Directory not empty
To free space in such mounted volumes the .Trash-1000 folder must be deleted from a different system.
Is there any way to prevent Nemo or Nautilus from creating this folder in network drives? I can naturally simply not use them, but they are handy in many situations.
nautilus trash nemo network-drive
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
1
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
As a workaround, you can create an empty.Trash-1000folder yourself, and usechmod 000 .Trash-1000and/orsudo chattr +i .Trash-1000to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)
– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20
|
show 1 more comment
Both Nautilus and Nemo create hidden folders called .Trash-1000 in any mounted device, apparently to manage their Trash folder. This is mighty confusing in network drives that are mounted by other users, that may be using other operating systems or programmes that do not recognise this folder as a trash bin.
Moreover, this folder expands with the number of files deleted and can not be erased from Ubuntu:
$ sudo rm -rf ./.Trash-1000
rm: cannot remove './.Trash-1000/files': Directory not empty
To free space in such mounted volumes the .Trash-1000 folder must be deleted from a different system.
Is there any way to prevent Nemo or Nautilus from creating this folder in network drives? I can naturally simply not use them, but they are handy in many situations.
nautilus trash nemo network-drive
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
Both Nautilus and Nemo create hidden folders called .Trash-1000 in any mounted device, apparently to manage their Trash folder. This is mighty confusing in network drives that are mounted by other users, that may be using other operating systems or programmes that do not recognise this folder as a trash bin.
Moreover, this folder expands with the number of files deleted and can not be erased from Ubuntu:
$ sudo rm -rf ./.Trash-1000
rm: cannot remove './.Trash-1000/files': Directory not empty
To free space in such mounted volumes the .Trash-1000 folder must be deleted from a different system.
Is there any way to prevent Nemo or Nautilus from creating this folder in network drives? I can naturally simply not use them, but they are handy in many situations.
nautilus trash nemo network-drive
nautilus trash nemo network-drive
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
edited Feb 26 at 7:32
Luís de Sousa
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
asked Feb 25 at 8:35
Luís de SousaLuís de Sousa
9,2451752104
9,2451752104
1
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
As a workaround, you can create an empty.Trash-1000folder yourself, and usechmod 000 .Trash-1000and/orsudo chattr +i .Trash-1000to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)
– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20
|
show 1 more comment
1
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
As a workaround, you can create an empty.Trash-1000folder yourself, and usechmod 000 .Trash-1000and/orsudo chattr +i .Trash-1000to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)
– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20
1
1
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
As a workaround, you can create an empty
.Trash-1000 folder yourself, and use chmod 000 .Trash-1000 and/or sudo chattr +i .Trash-1000 to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
As a workaround, you can create an empty
.Trash-1000 folder yourself, and use chmod 000 .Trash-1000 and/or sudo chattr +i .Trash-1000 to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
After looking at Nautilus's source code and Michael Stumpfl's answer it becomes clear that trash folder creation, is something hard-coded in Nautilus's source code itself and is part of how libgio works - the library behind file manipulations in Gtk/GNOME applications. Therefore disabling such behavior is currently not possible without recompiling either the file manager itself or altering source code of the library ( which I wouldn't recommend doing, since other applications rely on it, so changes may affect other applications' behavior ).
Probably the best solution is to propose a feature request to Nautilus developers and wait until it is fixed. One could also resort to permanent deletion of files via Shift+Delete short cut or using command-line utilities such as mv (move to user's trash folder on / filesystem) or rm. Otherwise - switch to using different file manager for the time being.
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
1
If this is hard coded inlibgiowould it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies onlibgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such asmidnight-commanderdoesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact withlibgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1121039%2fprevent-nautilus-nemo-from-creating-trash-1000-folder-in-mounted-devices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
After looking at Nautilus's source code and Michael Stumpfl's answer it becomes clear that trash folder creation, is something hard-coded in Nautilus's source code itself and is part of how libgio works - the library behind file manipulations in Gtk/GNOME applications. Therefore disabling such behavior is currently not possible without recompiling either the file manager itself or altering source code of the library ( which I wouldn't recommend doing, since other applications rely on it, so changes may affect other applications' behavior ).
Probably the best solution is to propose a feature request to Nautilus developers and wait until it is fixed. One could also resort to permanent deletion of files via Shift+Delete short cut or using command-line utilities such as mv (move to user's trash folder on / filesystem) or rm. Otherwise - switch to using different file manager for the time being.
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
1
If this is hard coded inlibgiowould it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies onlibgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such asmidnight-commanderdoesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact withlibgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
add a comment |
After looking at Nautilus's source code and Michael Stumpfl's answer it becomes clear that trash folder creation, is something hard-coded in Nautilus's source code itself and is part of how libgio works - the library behind file manipulations in Gtk/GNOME applications. Therefore disabling such behavior is currently not possible without recompiling either the file manager itself or altering source code of the library ( which I wouldn't recommend doing, since other applications rely on it, so changes may affect other applications' behavior ).
Probably the best solution is to propose a feature request to Nautilus developers and wait until it is fixed. One could also resort to permanent deletion of files via Shift+Delete short cut or using command-line utilities such as mv (move to user's trash folder on / filesystem) or rm. Otherwise - switch to using different file manager for the time being.
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
1
If this is hard coded inlibgiowould it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies onlibgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such asmidnight-commanderdoesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact withlibgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
add a comment |
After looking at Nautilus's source code and Michael Stumpfl's answer it becomes clear that trash folder creation, is something hard-coded in Nautilus's source code itself and is part of how libgio works - the library behind file manipulations in Gtk/GNOME applications. Therefore disabling such behavior is currently not possible without recompiling either the file manager itself or altering source code of the library ( which I wouldn't recommend doing, since other applications rely on it, so changes may affect other applications' behavior ).
Probably the best solution is to propose a feature request to Nautilus developers and wait until it is fixed. One could also resort to permanent deletion of files via Shift+Delete short cut or using command-line utilities such as mv (move to user's trash folder on / filesystem) or rm. Otherwise - switch to using different file manager for the time being.
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
After looking at Nautilus's source code and Michael Stumpfl's answer it becomes clear that trash folder creation, is something hard-coded in Nautilus's source code itself and is part of how libgio works - the library behind file manipulations in Gtk/GNOME applications. Therefore disabling such behavior is currently not possible without recompiling either the file manager itself or altering source code of the library ( which I wouldn't recommend doing, since other applications rely on it, so changes may affect other applications' behavior ).
Probably the best solution is to propose a feature request to Nautilus developers and wait until it is fixed. One could also resort to permanent deletion of files via Shift+Delete short cut or using command-line utilities such as mv (move to user's trash folder on / filesystem) or rm. Otherwise - switch to using different file manager for the time being.
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
edited Feb 25 at 9:26
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
answered Feb 25 at 9:21
Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy
74.7k9155325
74.7k9155325
1
If this is hard coded inlibgiowould it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies onlibgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such asmidnight-commanderdoesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact withlibgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
add a comment |
1
If this is hard coded inlibgiowould it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies onlibgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such asmidnight-commanderdoesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact withlibgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
1
1
If this is hard coded in
libgio would it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
If this is hard coded in
libgio would it make a difference to use an alternative file manager?– Luís de Sousa
Feb 25 at 10:43
4
4
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies on
libgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such as midnight-commander doesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact with libgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
@LuísdeSousa Not every file manager relies on
libgio. Dolphin for example doesn't. Command-line file manager such as midnight-commander doesn't. In general, those applications that don't rely on Gtk toolkit don't come in contact with libgio. Of course, there could be exceptions.– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 10:47
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1121039%2fprevent-nautilus-nemo-from-creating-trash-1000-folder-in-mounted-devices%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
@LuísdeSousa Now, I've provided an answer as to current state of affairs, that is currently it is not possible to have such feature. However, I would ask you to remain patient for next week or so, and I might return with a better solution. OK ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Feb 25 at 9:27
As a workaround, you can create an empty
.Trash-1000folder yourself, and usechmod 000 .Trash-1000and/orsudo chattr +i .Trash-1000to prevent Nautilus from populating it. (I haven't actually tried this, but I would if I had this problem.)– pts
Feb 25 at 10:50
pts this is similar to the traditional workaround on thumb drives - create an empty file (not folder) called .Trash-1000 this confuses gnome enough to stop it.
– don bright
Feb 26 at 1:53
@pts This will keep other users confused about it. Moreover, in Samba drives Linux permissions have no meaning.
– Luís de Sousa
Feb 26 at 7:35
@LuísdeSousa: For Samba shares, do the chmod or chattr on the Samba server (samba.org). I undertstand that each solution and workaround has its tradeoffs. Nevertheless, it's better to know about a workaround and its tradeoff than not to know. Hence I posted it as a comment.
– pts
Feb 26 at 8:20